Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
J.B.PARDIWALA, NIRAL R. MEHTA, JJ.
ARIHANT AGRO SALES - APPELLANT
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT - RESPONDENT
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10607 of 2021
Decided On : 25-11-2021
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226 - Writ petition - Challenging tender inviting fresh applications for awarding transport contract by cancelling earlier tender process for same work and - Sought direction upon respondent authority to forthwith open technical bid submitted in connection with first Tender - Petitioner being engaged in business of trading and transportation of grains etc. and having sufficient number of trucks for purpose of transportation, applied for tender - Respondents published fresh tender for same nature of work contract - As per petitioner, publishing a fresh tender by ignoring earlier tender process in which petitioner had participated, is nothing but to favour Road-lines company, that too having realized that petitioner’s quote was lower than they offered - Before cancelling tender process, no opportunity of hearing was given - Action on part of respondent - corporation is violative of principles of natural justice - Respondent - corporation, submitted that petition alleging mala fides and connivance, without joining conniving party as respondent, is not maintainable - Whether tendering authority is justified in cancelling tender process, in facts and circumstances of present case - Held, cancellation of an earlier tender at instance of respondent - corporation was because of an incident of having lost digital key to open financial bid - Entire tender process was on-line process - Digital key was very crucial so as to maintain confidentiality as well as safety of entire process - Having lost digital key, respondent - corporation had in its wisdom deemed not fit to go on with tender process - Cancellation of entire process from stage of technical bid and before opening of financial bid, is well justified and cannot be said to be an arbitrary action - So far as contentions as to mala fide and favourtism are concerned, petitioner could not be able to produced any single evidence so as to establish mala fide intention of respondent - corporation and also any favourtism made to various transporters as alleged - Petitioner with regard to cancellation of tender process without any reasons and/or without affording any opportunity of hearing is concerned, when respondent - corporation being a public body had taken a policy decision to cancel tender process keeping in view larger public interest, judicial review of that decision is very limited - Merely because petitioner had participated in tender process and submitted its bid, would not create any right in his favour - Having appeared in tender process would mean only an offer which is always subject to acceptance by tendering authority - If, tendering authority takes any decision to cancel tender process at any stage, would not make it illegal provided cancellation of tender process is not arbitrarily or discriminatory to any of parties - Writ petition rejected.
ORDER :
NIRAL R. MEHTA, J
1. By way of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the Tender Notice dated 18.7.2021 inviting, inter-alia, fresh applications for awarding transport contract by cancelling earlier tender process for same work and further sought direction upon the respondent authority to forthwith open the technical bid submitted in connection with the first Tender Notice dated 13.5.2021, in other words, to continue tender process initiated in connection with Tender Notice dated 13.05.2021.
2. The facts, according to the petitioner, giving rise to the present petition can be narrated, in nutshell, are as under :
2.2 The petitioner being engaged in the business of trading and transportation of grains etc. and having sufficient number of trucks for the purpose of transportation, applied for the said tender through E-Tendering process on 22.5.2021 for Surat District and thereby deposited Rs.18 lakh as per the tender condition. However, the date for submitting technical bid came to be extended from 24.5.2021 to 2.6.2021 and accordingly, the technical bid opening date was also extended from 26.5.2021 to 4.6.2021 on the ground of Covid-19 and “TAAU” cyclone.
2.3 The above dates again came to be extended from 2.6.2021 to 7.6.2021 and from 4.6.2021 to 8.6.2021 respectively by Corrigendum No.4 dated 2.6.2021. Further, for the 3rd time, the said date was extended from 7.6.2021 to 10.6.2021 and from 8.6.2021 to 11.6.2021 by way of Corrigendum dated 5.6.2021. Again, the said dates were extended from 8.6.2021 to 14.6.2021 and from 11.6.2021 to 15.6.2021 respectively by Corrigendum No.6 dated 8.6.2021.
2.4 The petitioner had also applied for other 3 Districts, namely, Tapi, Navsari and Bharuch on 29.5.2021, 5.6.2021 and 13.6.2021 respectively during the extension time for submitting the technical bid.
2.5 According to the petitioner, for the Surat District, the petitioner and one Ratna R. Shah of Rachna Roadways had applied, for Tapi District the petitioner, J.M. Roadways as well as Creative Transportation had applied and for Navsari District, the petitioner and one Lakshmi Roadways had applied. Further, as per the case of the petitioner, Rachna Roadways, J.M. Roadways and Lakshmi Roadways belonged to one family and they tried to allure the petitioner for withdrawing from the bid, however, the petitioner did not succumb to the allurement and determined to participate in the bid. Therefore, those transporters having used their political clout, hijack the process of tender and halt the opening of bid which was to be opened on 15.6.2021.
2.6 Thereafter, the respondents published fresh Tender Notice on 18.7.2021 for the same nature of work contract. As per the petitioner, publishing a fresh Tender Notice by ignoring the earlier tender process in which the petitioner had participated, is nothing but to favour the aforesaid Road-lines company, that too having realized that the petitioner’s quote was lower than they offered.
2.7 Being aggrieved by the aforesaid, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of present writ petition for the reliefs stated herein-above. In furtherance thereto, this Court vide order dated 28.7.2021 issued Notice. The said order dated 28.7.2021 reads, thus;
“1. Mr. Prajapati, the learned counsel appearing for the writ applicant is permitted to implead the Gujarat State Civil Supply Corp
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
